State Continuity and its Consequences: The Case of the Baltic States

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 377-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
PETER VAN ELSUWEGE

The recognition of Baltic independence in 1991 led to a number of challenges in their relationship with Russia. The legal status of large Russian-speaking minorities in Latvia and Estonia, the unresolved border questions, and the particular situation of Kaliningrad have proved to be the most pressing of these. This article tries to link these topical political issues with international law practice on state continuity. It refers to competing visions of Baltic statehood and its political and legal consequences, particularly in the context of the forthcoming enlargement of NATO and the EU.

Author(s):  
V. V. Vorotnikov

The economic crisis fueled contradictions among the parties and weakened public support of internal and external policies of the Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia). Natural necessity to abandon previous one-sided Euro-Atlantic foreign political and foreign economic orientation in favor of more balanced approach towards relations with Eastern neighbours (primarily with Russia) has become the issue of key importance that turned out to be a stumbling block for main political parties (ruling parties, opposition, so called ‚Russian‘ parties) in the Baltic states. The attitude to this problem became crucial during recent political crisis in Latvia, whereas in Lithuania and Estonia it led to changing rhetoric on foreign political issues by opposition parties. It is possible to nominally define the political situation in Lithuania as partisan consensus, whereas in Latvia and Estonia foreign political strategies complicated by unresolved domestic ethnic and language minorities problems are a battlegroud for ruling right-wing conservative coalitions and social-democratic oppositions. So, main social and political forces in the Baltic states faced the task to find a new consensus on foreign political issues in order to efficiently develop national economies under the conditions of financial economic turbulence in the EU and worldwide as well as to support social unity.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Tomas Bekišas

This paper aims to determine Lithuania’s, Latvia’s, and Estonia’s parties’ positions on the European Union (EU) and to ascertain whether these party positions mirror their voters’ positions on the EU. Analysis suggests that parties in this region have rather varied positions on the EU, with the exception of hard-Eurosceptic views, which are absent in Baltic states’ party systems. This paper also indicates that parties in the Baltic states tend to mirror, with some exceptions, their voters positions on the EU. This suggests that there may be additional factors determining parties’ positions regarding the EU in the Baltics.


2018 ◽  
pp. 135-148
Author(s):  
Liutauras Gudžinskas ◽  
Tomas Bekišas
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Tanel Kerikmäe ◽  
Archil Chochia ◽  
Max Atallah

Integration with the European Union has been far less distressing for the three Baltic States than for numerous other accessing countries owing to their strong societal impetus to (re)join Western political, economic, and legal culture after they regained their independence from the Soviet Union in 1990. However, the accession of these states—Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania—had several distinctive features related to constitutional background and settings, which heavily influenced problem solving between government and the EU institutions. In general, the controversial issues regarding how to solve the problems with supranational power have never been dramatic with regard to the Baltic States, which leads to the assumption that often the governments have taken rather compliant positions. The latest cases, such as the European Stabilization Mechanism, indicate the change in paradigm: the three Baltic States are more aware of the margin of appreciation and actual borderlines between policy making- and decision making. Today, in setting up an EU-related agenda, more skills than previously are needed in finding allies and choosing partners. The road the Baltic States took in joining the EU was a difficult one, nor has their role in the EU been easy. Should a small state with a big initiative be allowed to mentor other member states regarding that initiative, meaning in particular Estonia and its digital development? Another peculiar aspect of the Baltic States is their (inter)relationship with Russia. Considering themselves a bridge between East and West, the Baltics have been active in Eastern Partnership and Development Aid initiatives and have also spoken out strongly against intervention in Georgia and Ukraine. This position sometimes complicates any EU attempt to achieve consensus on foreign policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document